iOS 10.1 degrades download speeds on AT&T LTE

[sirozha]

I have a Verizon iPhone 7 (bought from Apple for full price), which I am using on AT&T. The cell tower is about 100 yards from my house.

I upgraded to iOS 10.0.3 two days ago, and I ran a test on Speedtest.net immediately after the upgrade to iOS 10.0.3 and got 102 Mbps. My highest download speed was on iOS 10.0.2 - 120 Mbps.

Yesterday I upgraded from iOS 10.0.3 to iOS 10.1, and since the upgrade I haven't been able to get more than 60 Mbps down when checked on speediest.net.

Today I ran the speed test on my wife's iPhone 6s Plus sitting right next to my iPhone 7. Both iPhones are on AT&T. My wife's iPhone 6s Plus consistently got download speeds that were about 25% higher than my iPhone 7. The iPhone 6s Plus is currently running iOS 10.0.2, whereas my iPhone 7 is now running iOS 10.1 (modem firmware 1.25.00; carrier update is AT&T 26.0).

Prior to updating to iOS 10.1, I had the issue with the iPhone 7 switching from LTE to 4G, and the download speed dropping tenfold (to about 12 Mbps when on 4G). The iPhone 7 was on iOS 10.0.3 for only one day, so I'm not sure if 10.0.3 fixed the issue of random switching from LTE to 4G, but I know for sure that I was getting download speeds exceeding 100 Mbps on iOS 10.0.2 and 10.0.3. iOS 10.1 seems to have rectified the issue of random switching from LTE to 4G, but the download speed is only 50% of what it used to be on iOS 10.0.2 and 10.0.3.
-------------

I ended up downgrading my iPhone 7 from iOS 10.1 to iOS 10.0.3 (yes, Apple is still signing 10.0.3 as of October 26 at 7:00 PM US Eastern Time). The iOS downgrade to 10.0.3 also downgraded the modem firmware from 1.25.00 to 1.00.05 and downgraded the carrier update from AT&T 26.0 to AT&T 25.0.

My download speeds returned to pre-iOS 10.1 values, and speedtest.net run on iPhone 7 now consistently shows download speeds that are about 20% higher than those on my wife's iPhone 6s Plus running iOS 10.0.2.

Whether Apple will admit this or not, iOS 10.1 degrades LTE download speed on iPhone 7 (Qaulcomm modem version of iPhone 7) when used with AT&T.

 

[Low country]

WOW.....another reason to stay where I'm at at 10.0.3
I just do NOT get why there are SO MANY issues with Apple updates!! Is that not what all the beta releases are for?....to iron out the bugs? Do they not see these issues before they go public????

 

[sirozha]

WOW.....another reason to stay where I'm at at 10.0.3
I just do NOT get why there are SO MANY issues with Apple updates!! Is that not what all the beta releases are for?....to iron out the bugs? Do they not see these issues before they go public????

When I was buying my Verizon-version of iPhone 7 at an Apple store (to get an unlocked iPhone 7 version), I was told by Apple "geniuses" that the Verizon version of iPhone 7 would not work on AT&T. I know they had no idea what they were talking about, but this is the same advice they gave to millions of others who wanted to buy an iPhone 7 with the Qualcomm modem to be used on GSM carriers. Because Apple started selling the SIM-less version of iPhone 7 just a couple weeks ago (which is the same hardware as the Verizon version of iPhone 7 but without a Verizon SIM pre-installed), there are not many of those who are running Qualcomm-version iPhone 7 on AT&T yet. Hence, the beta testing of iOS 10.1 may not have considered my use case scenario. I agree, though, that Apple's track record in software testing prior to general release is not very good. I'm saying this with quite a bit of disappointment - both as an Apple consumer and a shareholder with a very sizable AAPL portfolio.

 

[mazdamiata210]

When I was buying my Verizon-version of iPhone 7 at an Apple store (to get an unlocked iPhone 7 version), I was told by Apple "geniuses" that the Verizon version of iPhone 7 would not work on AT&T. I know they had no idea what they were talking about, but this is the same advice they gave to millions of others who wanted to buy an iPhone 7 with the Qualcomm modem to be used on GSM carriers. Because Apple started selling the SIM-less version of iPhone 7 just a couple weeks ago (which is the same hardware as the Verizon version of iPhone 7 but without a Verizon SIM pre-installed), there are not many of those who are running Qualcomm-version iPhone 7 on AT&T yet. Hence, the beta testing of iOS 10.1 may not have considered my use case scenario. I agree, though, that Apple's track record in software testing prior to general release is not very good. I'm saying this with quite a bit of disappointment - both as an Apple consumer and a shareholder with a very sizable AAPL portfolio.

They're not totally wrong... It can't handle some of the AT&T LTE bands, but that doesn't mean it won't work at all lol

 

[sirozha]

They're not totally wrong... It can't handle some of the AT&T LTE bands, but that doesn't mean it won't work at all lol

And which AT&T bands can the Verizon (or SIM-less) version of iPhone 7 not handle?

The answer is, All bands supported by the Intel modem (installed in the AT&T iPhone 7) are also supported by the Qualcomm modem (installed in the Verizon or SIM-less iPhone 7).

What you described was the situation with iPhone 6s, whereby the Verizon version lacked one AT&T LTE band.

 

[Low country]

And which AT&T bands can the Verizon (or SIM-less) version of iPhone 7 not handle?

The answer is, All bands supported by the Intel modem (installed in the AT&T iPhone 7) are also supported by the Qualcomm modem (installed in the Verizon or SIM-less iPhone 7).

What you described was the situation with iPhone 6s, whereby the Verizon version lacked one AT&T LTE band.

Which I believe was band 30...maybe?

 

[mazdamiata210]

And which AT&T bands can the Verizon (or SIM-less) version of iPhone 7 not handle?

The answer is, All bands supported by the Intel modem (installed in the AT&T iPhone 7) are also supported by the Qualcomm modem (installed in the Verizon or SIM-less iPhone 7).

What you described was the situation with iPhone 6s, whereby the Verizon version lacked one AT&T LTE band.

As you can see, the frequencies are different even though the bands are the same.

 

[Mlrollin91]

I have no issues with my speeds post 10.1 from 10.0.3. There are way too many variables to correctly test your method. You have no idea of the tower load at a given time and could be 100% coincidence to the time you were on 10.1 and then downgraded to 10.0.3.

The only thing that would prove your theory is if you had two of the same exact phones, one on 10.1 and the other on 10.0.3 and run the test at the same exact time. And even that will lead to unintended variables/consequences.

 

[sirozha]

I have no issues with my speeds post 10.1 from 10.0.3. There are way too many variables to correctly test your method. You have no idea of the tower load at a given time and could be 100% coincidence to the time you were on 10.1 and then downgraded to 10.0.3.

The only thing that would prove your theory is if you had two of the same exact phones, one on 10.1 and the other on 10.0.3 and run the test at the same exact time. And even that will lead to unintended variables/consequences.

My theory was proven by comparing the download speeds of iPhone 7 with iPhone 6s Plus (running iOS 10.0.2).

When iPhone 7 was running iOS 10.1, its download speed was consistently 25% lower than the download speed of iPhone 6s Plus. Once I downgraded iPhone 7 to iOS 10.0.3, the iPhone 7 download speed was consistently 20% better than the download speed of iPhone 6s Plus. iPhone 6s Plus ran the same iOS version during these tests - iOS 10.0.2.

I tested multiple times by running the Speedtest.net app to the same server on both phones. The app was run simultaneously on both phones sitting within 6 inches from each other.

Obviously, the RF conditions constantly change on any tower, but my tests were run simultaneously on both phones.

I did not have two iPhone 7 running two different iOS versions; however, comparing iPhone 7 download speed with iPhone 6s Plus download speed in the manner that I did is a valid test. Having said this, this morning I'm getting 120 Mbps on iPhone 7 running iOS 10.0.3, whereas yesterday I couldn't exceed 60 Mbps all day long while the iPhone 7 was running iOS 10.1.
[doublepost=1477559900][/doublepost]

---------

As you can see, the frequencies are different even though the bands are the same.

The table that you posted shows the bands that the carriers use, not the bands that the iPhone 7 models support.

Look at the table you posted. It shows that Sprint and Verizon have different frequencies; however, its common knowledge that the Sprint iPhone 7 is the same EXACT model as Verizon iPhone 7.

 

[T5BRICK]

Which I believe was band 30...maybe?

Both Intel and Qualcomm based iPhone 7/7+ models have band 30. Maybe you're thinking of the 6s?

As you can see, the frequencies are different even though the bands are the same.

Incorrect. The Intel and Qualcomm iPhone 7/7+ models have all the same LTE bands. The Qualcomm model also has CDMA bands that are required for Sprint/Verizon. Both models support all of the LTE bands used by AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon.

http://www.apple.com/iphone-7/specs/[/quote]

 

[sbailey4]

WOW.....another reason to stay where I'm at at 10.0.3
I just do NOT get why there are SO MANY issues with Apple updates!! Is that not what all the beta releases are for?....to iron out the bugs? Do they not see these issues before they go public????

Keep in mind that the iP7 was not available during the beta testing of iOS 10.1. So only Apple can actually test it in this case and they dont have the same set of variables as public beta testing would uncover.

 

[Mlrollin91]

My theory was proven by comparing the download speeds of iPhone 7 with iPhone 6s Plus (running iOS 10.0.2).

When iPhone 7 was running iOS 10.1, its download speed was consistently 25% lower than the download speed of iPhone 6s Plus. Once I downgraded iPhone 7 to iOS 10.0.3, the iPhone 7 download speed was consistently 20% better than the download speed of iPhone 6s Plus. iPhone 6s Plus ran the same iOS version during these tests - iOS 10.0.2.

I tested multiple times by running the Speedtest.net app to the same server on both phones. The app was run simultaneously on both phones sitting within 6 inches from each other.

Obviously, the RF conditions constantly change on any tower, but my tests were run simultaneously on both phones.

I did not have two iPhone 7 running two different iOS versions; however, comparing iPhone 7 download speed with iPhone 6s Plus download speed in the manner that I did is a valid test. Having said this, this morning I'm getting 120 Mbps on iPhone 7 running iOS 10.0.3, whereas yesterday I couldn't exceed 60 Mbps all day long while the iPhone 7 was running iOS 10.1.

Again. There are two many variables to account for and using two different devices with two different hardware specs. It's a variable that could lead to unintended consequences.

The only way to run the test is to have two exact devices. One on 10.0.2/3 and one on 10.1. Running a 7 and 6sPlus is not controlling for variables in hardware. And that is only one variable. Tower stress is another one you will not be able to control for, even if both tests are ran at the same exact time.

But it is way to premature to claim speed degration because of an update. One person experiencing an issue does not mean it's an issue.

 

[sirozha]

Again. There are two many variables to account for and using two different devices with two different hardware specs. It's a variable that could lead to unintended consequences.

The only way to run the test is to have two exact devices. One on 10.0.2/3 and one on 10.1. Running a 7 and 6sPlus is not controlling for variables in hardware. And that is only one variable. Tower stress is another one you will not be able to control for, even if both tests are ran at the same exact time.

But it is way to premature to claim speed degration because of an update. One person experiencing an issue does not mean it's an issue.

I reported the issue to Apple last night, and we will see if anything comes out of it. For me, the CDMA/GSM iPhone 7 download speeds were affected severely by iOS 10.1. I posted this here so that if others experience the same issue, there's a point of reference for them and a way to rectify the problem - as long as they can still downgrade to 10.0.3.

 

[campyguy]

VZW and ATTWS customer here. A couple of bits of input/feedback. First, there are issues with the baseband in iOS 10 for both carriers; I can't offer input on any other carrier. Specific to ATTWS, I hadn't updated my mom's iP6S to iOS 10 until the official release, while my identical iP6S was on the dev betas; her phone was seeing "4G" in places my phone was getting "No Service" and, now that her phone has been updated she's getting "4G" where there was a solid LTE indicator (I'm using the hidden, built-in Phone Test app for my own uses) and her phone is on-par with mine for service levels. We're in a rural area, but with a direct line-of-sight to the nearest ATTWS antennas (I assisted with the tower install some 10 years ago, so I know where it's located...).

On the VZW side, there are several devices at hand as I have a few employees with me at my field office - iP6, iP6S+, iPad Air 2, and iPad Pro. Only the Air 2 gets a solid signal and throughput, while the iPhones can go from solid LTE to "No Service" in a matter of feet - 2 feet, and I'm not exaggerating. And, I know where the VZW and USCC towers are as well. 10.1 improved network connectivity, but one VZW iP6 that's not been updated from 9.3.5 gets solid network connectivity and it's the one with my SIM in it.

IMHO, somebody at Apple screwed with the baseband and/or - and I'm going to emphasize "OR" the major carriers haven't fully load balanced their networks yet. In Portland yesterday, on my Air 2 I was consistently experiencing fairly high latency and fairly low throughput while outdoors (3-6 Mbps down, less than 1 up) while I'm seeing 35Mbps down/10 up while 30 miles from pretty much everywhere in my rural location (I'm tethered to my Air 2 now as there's no hardwired internet here). ATTWS results are fairly similar, in an urban area and in a rural area. The similar results lead me to believe that the two carriers have not fully load-balanced their network and/or the baseband(s) still needs a bit of tweaking.

Next bit - blocking of bands. I use a ATTWS GoPhone Lumia 640, with a modified ROM so that I could get it updated to Win Phone 10 and connect it to my Exchange Server via wifi. I've been using modified mobile phone ROMs for 8-10 years to get what I want, which is often not what carriers want to spoon feed me and charge extra money for. My point here is both 640 ROMs (stock Win 8 and modded Win 10) both block Band 12 - it's fully locked down so the notoriously-cheap-but-resourceful T-Mo users couldn't use Band 12 while using a $30 GoPhone (ATTWS signed an interop agreement with T-Mo and USCC some time ago, but there's still only limited access to Band 12 as ATTWS customers get priority on that frequency).

Also, with the Lumia, I have used it with my ATTWS SIM - MS's new Maps app and its navigation blow Apple Maps away and its POI database is much, much more complete - but I have to call into ATTWS CS to re-provision my account when I make that SIM swap. The VZW iPhone you have should be re-provisioned - I also re-provision my VZW iP6S+ when I sim-swap my ATTWS SIM from my iP6S. I don't get certain features working properly - like VoLTE - on my VZW iP6S+ until it's "registered" on the ATTWS network, which requires calling in from another line, asking for the re-provisioning, shutting down your iPhone when they tell you, then powering up your iPhone when they tell you.

Gotta get back to work, good luck...

 

[sirozha]

VZW and ATTWS customer here. A couple of bits of input/feedback. First, there are issues with the baseband in iOS 10 for both carriers; I can't offer input on any other carrier. Specific to ATTWS, I hadn't updated my mom's iP6S to iOS 10 until the official release, while my identical iP6S was on the dev betas; her phone was seeing "4G" in places my phone was getting "No Service" and, now that her phone has been updated she's getting "4G" where there was a solid LTE indicator (I'm using the hidden, built-in Phone Test app for my own uses) and her phone is on-par with mine for service levels. We're in a rural area, but with a direct line-of-sight to the nearest ATTWS antennas (I assisted with the tower install some 10 years ago, so I know where it's located...).

On the VZW side, there are several devices at hand as I have a few employees with me at my field office - iP6, iP6S+, iPad Air 2, and iPad Pro. Only the Air 2 gets a solid signal and throughput, while the iPhones can go from solid LTE to "No Service" in a matter of feet - 2 feet, and I'm not exaggerating. And, I know where the VZW and USCC towers are as well. 10.1 improved network connectivity, but one VZW iP6 that's not been updated from 9.3.5 gets solid network connectivity and it's the one with my SIM in it.

IMHO, somebody at Apple screwed with the baseband and/or - and I'm going to emphasize "OR" the major carriers haven't fully load balanced their networks yet. In Portland yesterday, on my Air 2 I was consistently experiencing fairly high latency and fairly low throughput while outdoors (3-6 Mbps down, less than 1 up) while I'm seeing 35Mbps down/10 up while 30 miles from pretty much everywhere in my rural location (I'm tethered to my Air 2 now as there's no hardwired internet here). ATTWS results are fairly similar, in an urban area and in a rural area. The similar results lead me to believe that the two carriers have not fully load-balanced their network and/or the baseband(s) still needs a bit of tweaking.

Next bit - blocking of bands. I use a ATTWS GoPhone Lumia 640, with a modified ROM so that I could get it updated to Win Phone 10 and connect it to my Exchange Server via wifi. I've been using modified mobile phone ROMs for 8-10 years to get what I want, which is often not what carriers want to spoon feed me and charge extra money for. My point here is both 640 ROMs (stock Win 8 and modded Win 10) both block Band 12 - it's fully locked down so the notoriously-cheap-but-resourceful T-Mo users couldn't use Band 12 while using a $30 GoPhone (ATTWS signed an interop agreement with T-Mo and USCC some time ago, but there's still only limited access to Band 12 as ATTWS customers get priority on that frequency).

Also, with the Lumia, I have used it with my ATTWS SIM - MS's new Maps app and its navigation blow Apple Maps away and its POI database is much, much more complete - but I have to call into ATTWS CS to re-provision my account when I make that SIM swap. The VZW iPhone you have should be re-provisioned - I also re-provision my VZW iP6S+ when I sim-swap my ATTWS SIM from my iP6S. I don't get certain features working properly - like VoLTE - on my VZW iP6S+ until it's "registered" on the ATTWS network, which requires calling in from another line, asking for the re-provisioning, shutting down your iPhone when they tell you, then powering up your iPhone when they tell you.

Gotta get back to work, good luck...

I'm not sure I understand the "reprovisioning" comment. My "Verizon" iPhone 7 is the same exact phone as the "SIM-less" iPhone 7. The only difference is that Apple didn't sell the "SIM-less" iPhone 7 for the first month after the release of iPhone 7, so I bought the "Verizon" version.

With the "SIM-less" iPhone 7, anyone should be able to get a SIM card from any carrier anywhere in the world, insert it into the iPhone 7 and use with that carrier. The AT&T SIM that I inserted in the "Verizon" iPhone 7 was the SIM that I used in my iPhone 5s (also the "Verizon" version). My visual email started working immediately after I moved the AT&T SIM from the "Verizon" iPhone 5s to the "Verizon" iPhone 7.

I don't understand what "provisioning" is required by AT&T in this case. The concept of SIM cards and unlocked phones should allow users to change carriers by putting another SIM card in the same phone. As long as the phone supports all the frequencies that the new carrier uses, everything should work fine. The iPhones automatically download the carrier-specific updates as soon as the iPhone is connected to a new carrier. My "Verizon" iPhone 7 is showing an AT&T carrier update because it sees that it's on the AT&T network.

In my opinion, the "Verizon" moniker of this iPhone meant simply that it was shipped with a Verizon SIM pre-installed. The same exact iPhone 7 model is sold as the "Sprint" iPhone 7 (with a Sprint SIM preinstalled) as well as the "SIM-less" iPhone 7 (with an empty SIM slot).

 

[campyguy]

I'm not sure I understand the "reprovisioning" comment. My "Verizon" iPhone 7 is the same exact phone as the "SIM-less" iPhone 7. The only difference is that Apple didn't sell the "SIM-less" iPhone 7 for the first month after the release of iPhone 7, so I bought the "Verizon" version.

With the "SIM-less" iPhone 7, anyone should be able to get a SIM card from any carrier anywhere in the world, insert it into the iPhone 7 and use with that carrier. The AT&T SIM that I inserted in the "Verizon" iPhone 7 was the SIM that I used in my iPhone 5s (also the "Verizon" version). My visual email started working immediately after I moved the AT&T SIM from the "Verizon" iPhone 5s to the "Verizon" iPhone 7.

I don't understand what "provisioning" is required by AT&T in this case. The concept of SIM cards and unlocked phones should allow users to change carriers by putting another SIM card in the same phone. As long as the phone supports all the frequencies that the new carrier uses, everything should work fine. The iPhones automatically download the carrier-specific updates as soon as the iPhone is connected to a new carrier. My "Verizon" iPhone 7 is showing an AT&T carrier update because it sees that it's on the AT&T network.

In my opinion, the "Verizon" moniker of this iPhone meant simply that it was shipped with a Verizon SIM pre-installed. The same exact iPhone 7 model is sold as the "Sprint" iPhone 7 (with a Sprint SIM preinstalled) as well as the "SIM-less" iPhone 7 (with an empty SIM slot).

ATTWS and VZW "tell" the device what services to expect, and there is more to it than that. VZW still uses PRL (Preferred Roaming List) codes that describe what services are provided - and they're also plan specific; my Nationwide Plan PRL is different than one a newer plan's PRL. ATTWS also uses config files, embedded in FW, to describe how a phone and network "talk" to each other.

As I alluded earlier, ATTWS purposely blocked certain frequencies in the Lumia 640. They de-prioritize Cricket, GoPhone, TracFone, T-Mo, and USCC on Band 12 so that ATTWS post-paid subs get first stab at Band 12. In a re-provisioning of a handset, ATTWS pushes a config file just as a carrier update would. Both ATTWS and VZW iPhones get carrier updates, but my VZW iPhones reboot after the install (not a full shutdown, but a reboot that's identical to the "hard reboot"). Install a T-Mo FW on that very same Lumia, and Band 12 is enabled, and there's plenty of feedback on this on the interwebs - installing a T-Mo SIM alone won't enable Band 12 on that handset...

A re-provisioning has nothing to do with visual voicemail, and putting a SIM in an iPhone will not enable all network services. VZW blocks out in FW bands that it doesn't use in the US - I use my VZW iPhones on other networks as I travel to other regions of the PNW that there's no VZW service. If I'm in an area that is native to USCC, I reset my Network Settings; if I'm in an ATTWS-served I tell them which iPhone I'm using - including the model number - they push a configuration file, and I'm good to go. Keep in mind, please, that I've been doing this with a few dozen phones (mine and my employees). Swapping in a SIM card is, to me, only the first step if it's a multi-carrier device. I'm offering my own advice, but I'll stand on my belief that there's other issues afoot as I alluded earlier.

 

[Glideslope]

at&t 7+ 128g. Downloads speed increased after 10.1 and the carrier update? 10.1 has the same Intel Firmware Upgrade as 10.0.3 for the at&y phones.

 

[MaskedCarrot]

I'm on AT&T, and signal used to be good. I used to for years get FULL bars of signal at home. Not since 10.0.3 and even on 10.1, it goes down to ONE bar and stays there while at home. The towers didn't change, and an old 5s at our house with 9.3.5 still gets full signal.